I was peeved enough (I save my outrage for ARRSE) that the Shrove Tuesday pancake race in Ripon, first organised in the 17th Century, was cancelled this year owing to H&S concerns (link) but now the PC meddlers have struck dangerously close to home. Havant Borough Council has cancelled the long-standing pancake race in Waterlooville because of "predicted weather forecasts and the strength of the wind." (link). What sort of wimps are we turning out these days? We seem have bred an entire generation of litigation-happy, risk-averse people and killjoys. We can't blame it all on the EU, surely?

Is there ever any legal basis to any of this PC madness or is it always the misinterpretation of rules by overzealous officials?

Has anyone seen maypole dancing anymore. Or has that to suffered the PC madness as well?

Click to expand...

Maypole dancing probably needs public liability insurance cover for which an H&SE risk assessment would be required (all those potentially strangling ribbons plus a pole that could topple over and crush thousands of innocent children). However, it doesn't appear to constitute 'regulated entertainment' which would require a Public Entertainment License costing even more money.

In general it is any making or playing of music, theatre, dance, cinema, sporting event or similar provided for the benefit of the public or club members or for profit. However, certain types of entertainment are specifically exempt from being licensable activities. These include:

â€¢ Product demonstrations, advertisements or educational / instructional films
â€¢ Any films in exhibits at a museum or gallery
â€¢ Incidental music (e.g. background music, jukeboxes etc.)
â€¢ Any televisions that are broadcasting a television signal (although televisions used to play pre-recorded films or DVDâ€™s would be regulated entertainment)
â€¢ Any religious services
â€¢ Most garden fetes, functions and events
â€¢ Morris dancing and similar activities
â€¢ Floats and moving vehicles at carnivals

NuLabour has been working flat out to kill ALL sense of English nationhood. Don't believe for one minute that these 'unintended consequences' are anything but hugely welcome to the traitorous Loony Left and its EU allies.

....is it always the misinterpretation of rules by overzealous officials?

Click to expand...

A couple of weeks ago I was in a meeting with a public sector official discussing a project, this response is typical of what I fairly regularly hear:

PSO We can't accept any risk

Me I'm sorry, this isn't achievable with no risk, we need to make decisions about what the risk balance is and where you're prepared to take that

PSO No, we can't accept any risk at all

And so it went on. He actually suggested not doing the project at all, because of the risk, until I pointed out the consequences of not doing the work we're talking about. This was not some low level functionary, but a 1-star equivalent.

They're risk averse, don't think about consequences and tend to default to not doing things, instead of finding ways to make things happen.

Mainly that I don't buy into the conspiracy theory of government, because given the size of the public sector the vast majority of people aren't making politically motivated decisions. Government, both central and local, make bad decisions because people, even to a fairly high level in the food chain, are risk averse.

Anybody leading walks on council land must take in a risk assessment. How slippy is the grass?? Very slippy moderately slippy or not slippy at all.

How large are the rabbit holes. Small medium or large. You must take into account the hole size and take in a survey of your groups boot size. Could a member be trapped in a small medium or large size size hole. Steps must be taken to avoid these holes.

We are working hard to safeguard the public who venture into the countryside.

All wooden stiles to be replaced by metal kissing gates to avoid splinters in general publics hands etc .

Stagnant ponds and waters to be fenced to prevent the spread of Leptospirosis (also known as Weil's disease, canicola fever, canefield fever, nanukayami fever. Normally spread by infected rats!!

In response to unfavorable publicity surrounding several fatal Army plane crashes, Brigadier General Oscar
Westover, the Assistant Chief of the Army Air Corps and commander of the Army Air Corps Mail
Operation (AACMO), the military department tasked to fly the air mail in 1934 when the
commercial air mail contracts were canceled, sent a message to his air mail zone commanders. It
stated: â€œThere will be no more accidents.â€ One of his zone commanders, B.Q. Jones, replied:
â€œThere will be no more flying.â€

maybe its todays society of "" i fell over and broke a nail!"" therefore YOU must pay Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£ is whats doing the main and real damage. Smaller firms and even private homes are now having to do risk asessments . even home insurrance now covers if youf friend falls down your stairs., what sort of friend would take you to court for money..

We seem to be a nation of "" MONEY GRABBER'S"" which i feel is a sad demise of a once great nation.

I had a minor car accident last year.. no damage to the children or the car, i how ever am still having nerve trouble..... the first thing freinds and family said was.... oooh make a claim... get lots of money.. WHY.. will this money do me any good.. NO not in my opinion. What if that poor chap that hit my car was self employed... he could have lost a lot more than a few nerves.. his family would have suffered...

In my simple and honest opinion these firms that offer to get you your "" so called dues "" even after years, should be ashamed of them selves..

Mainly that I don't buy into the conspiracy theory of government, because given the size of the public sector the vast majority of people aren't making politically motivated decisions. Government, both central and local, make bad decisions because people, even to a fairly high level in the food chain, are risk averse.

Click to expand...

Performance related pay may have contributed to PSO's behaviour. PRP in the public sector does not reward risk taking, as the consequences of adverse publicity should the venture go awry in some way will result in political embarrassment. Also, whereas in the private sector, the willingness to take risks is seen as a positive attribute, in the public sector in recent years (since Thatcher) this is simply not the case. Most people are unwilling to risk their promotion prospects by taking a gamble when playing the game (risk free) is rewarded. The other thing to bear in mind is that public sector workers are constantly pilloried by the press and Parliamentarians for any little error - something not typically experienced, I suspect, by most private sector employees. This demonisation of public sector workers is hardly conducive to the administrative or cultural entrepreneurism needed to take risks with taxpayers money.

Anybody leading walks on council land must take in a risk assessment. How slippy is the grass?? Very slippy moderately slippy or not slippy at all.

How large are the rabbit holes. Small medium or large. You must take into account the hole size and take in a survey of your groups boot size. Could a member be trapped in a small medium or large size size hole. Steps must be taken to avoid these holes.

We are working hard to safeguard the public who venture into the countryside.

All wooden stiles to be replaced by metal kissing gates to avoid splinters in general publics hands etc .

Stagnant ponds and waters to be fenced to prevent the spread of Leptospirosis (also known as Weil's disease, canicola fever, canefield fever, nanukayami fever. Normally spread by infected rats!!

Regards

Richard Head.

Click to expand...

Dont jest mate, friend of mine who's a farmer has several footpaths going across his land and this ain't to far from the truth.

Mainly that I don't buy into the conspiracy theory of government, because given the size of the public sector the vast majority of people aren't making politically motivated decisions. Government, both central and local, make bad decisions because people, even to a fairly high level in the food chain, are risk averse.

Click to expand...

Performance related pay may have contributed to PSO's behaviour. PRP in the public sector does not reward risk taking, as the consequences of adverse publicity should the venture go awry in some way will result in political embarrassment. Also, whereas in the private sector, the willingness to take risks is seen as a positive attribute, in the public sector in recent years (since Thatcher) this is simply not the case. Most people are unwilling to risk their promotion prospects by taking a gamble when playing the game (risk free) is rewarded.

Click to expand...

This may seem as a slight ramble but you are correct.

When I was doing Mr Blobby for the BBC the tossers at the BeeB where a bunch of limp wristed policy dodgers. I quite often attended meetings where the conduct of "Blobby" in up and coming engagements was mentioned, no one, I repeat no one was prepared to make a desicion on what Blobby was meant to do. So I said "I'm going to do this...any problems?" that gave them all wriggle room to demure and not commit. fcuking tossers.

I was peeved enough (I save my outrage for ARRSE) that the Shrove Tuesday pancake race in Ripon, first organised in the 17th Century, was cancelled this year owing to H&S concerns (link) but now the PC meddlers have struck dangerously close to home. Havant Borough Council has cancelled the long-standing pancake race in Waterlooville because of "predicted weather forecasts and the strength of the wind." (link). What sort of wimps are we turning out these days? We seem have bred an entire generation of litigation-happy, risk-averse people and killjoys. We can't blame it all on the EU, surely?

Is there ever any legal basis to any of this PC madness or is it always the misinterpretation of rules by overzealous officials?

Click to expand...

You can't blame any of it on the EU in my opinion.
Here I sit my ears still ringing from the (very close) fireworks that signalled the end of carnaval around here.
A week of partying, general debauchery and festivity that would make the wimpish UK H+E bods cringe.
Three massive parades to boot, all organised with a level of professionalism that wouldn't go amiss in a west end show.
If I knew how to add photos to these posts I'd love to show a few examples.

I was peeved enough (I save my outrage for ARRSE) that the Shrove Tuesday pancake race in Ripon, first organised in the 17th Century, was cancelled this year owing to H&S concerns (link) but now the PC meddlers have struck dangerously close to home. Havant Borough Council has cancelled the long-standing pancake race in Waterlooville because of "predicted weather forecasts and the strength of the wind." (link). What sort of wimps are we turning out these days? We seem have bred an entire generation of litigation-happy, risk-averse people and killjoys. We can't blame it all on the EU, surely?

Is there ever any legal basis to any of this PC madness or is it always the misinterpretation of rules by overzealous officials?

Click to expand...

I think it is far more down to the problems local authorities have had over recent years with public liability insurance, partly as a result if the compensation culture and ambulance chaser lawyers, and partly due to the problems the local authorities have had with their choice of insurer.

Performance related pay may have contributed to PSO's behaviour. PRP in the public sector does not reward risk taking, as the consequences of adverse publicity should the venture go awry in some way will result in political embarrassment. Also, whereas in the private sector, the willingness to take risks is seen as a positive attribute, in the public sector in recent years (since Thatcher) this is simply not the case. Most people are unwilling to risk their promotion prospects by taking a gamble when playing the game (risk free) is rewarded. The other thing to bear in mind is that public sector workers are constantly pilloried by the press and Parliamentarians for any little error - something not typically experienced, I suspect, by most private sector employees. This demonisation of public sector workers is hardly conducive to the administrative or cultural entrepreneurism needed to take risks with taxpayers money.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't disagree about public sector reward mechanisms, they do tend to encourage a statist behavior which really doesn't serve the changing needs of the citizen.

The mian issue is that every decision we make bears a range of risks, what's needed is a decision about which of these risks we're in a position to handle and which we can do something to mitigate for. There is an inherent tension between strategic (will it do what we want it to do), operational (will it continue to deliver consistently and reliably), financial (are we going to end up wasting money doing the wrong things or doing the right things badly), commercial (are we going to get shafted in the contract) etc. Bearing more operational risk reduces financial risk, reducing commercial risk frequently ends up increasing strategic risk. So we're never in a situation where risk doesn't exist, we just need to identify what the balance needs to be.

The reputational risk aspect is quite significant, and a difficult one to call, in the example I mentioned upthread the reputation impact of not doing the project far outweighed any other risks, but frequently it depends on what's fashionable with the media; data protection being the main current theme. In the examples that started this thread there probably wasn't a consideration of that in the decision making, because we're now so used to these petty directives that it has little impact.

I can't help thinking that we will wake up one day to find that every river, canal, seashore, quarry and mountain has been fenced off on H&S grounds. Two local incidents spring to mind:

Case 1: A private party was held one night at Fort Widley. A drunken late-arriving teenager decided that he couldn't be bothered to enter via the main entrance so he attempted a short cut via the moat. In the darkness, he got entangled in some brambles, lost his footing and fell into the moat, breaking his leg in the process. He was discovered the following morning and taken to A&E for treatment. His parents then claimed compensation because of the lack of warning signs, fencing and lighting.

Case 2: Some youths trespassed into a derelict MoD site nearby and climbed on to the roof of what appeared to be a single storey building. One of the youths fell through a skylight and was seriously injured (or even killed). His parents claimed compensation on the basis that the two storey height of the building was not apparent from the outside and there should have been signs pointing this out.

Much blame is put on schools for not instilling common sense in children but children spend only a fraction of their time in the classroom. Most of their time is spent at home or elsewhere so parents can't absolve themselves of all blame in such situations. Yet too many still try to do it.